Cognitive Dissonance

First let me thank readers of the Intrepid Liberal Journal for their patience. I’m still struggling to resolve my tech issues and continue to only have dial up access. Also, thanks for the emails asking if I’m OK. Rest assured I am fine and even with dialup I wanted to post some of the thoughts rattling in my head.

As we approach the final stretch of this presidential campaign I remain frustrated by the cognitive dissonance among the media and the public. Conventional wisdom suggests that Senator Obama represents dramatic change – almost revolutionary. Senator John McCain however is a conservative maverick we can trust as commander and chief even if we may disagree with him on other issues.

To a large extent this cognitive dissonance was reinforced by Obama’s selection of Senator Joe Biden as his running mate. The commentariat and punditocracy consistently repeated the meme that Obama was addressing his “weaknesses” in his selection of Joe Biden as a “reassuring” figure. Meanwhile, John McCain has once again demonstrated his maverick touch by selecting Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

It seems to me however that John McCain is neither conservative nor a maverick. John McCain is a radical nationalist and zealous proponent of American exceptionalism. His running mate is a compelling person with admirable qualities. It’s impossible not to like her or respect how Governor Palin challenged Alaska’s entrenched corrupt political establishment – a cause many bloggers on both the left and right have an affinity for.

However, Governor Palin is not a person to challenge Republican orthodoxy with respect to cultural issues or global warming. Nor will she represent any counterweight to the neocons that inhabit McCain’s foreign policy shop. Hence, Palin’s selection only reinforces that McCain is captive to the Christian radicals in his own party and has no interest in empowering any counterweight against the radical global vision the Bush/Cheney administration disastrously pursued. Simply put, Governor Palin being a heartbeat away from the presidency is no better than the prospect of John McCain becoming president.

As for Senator Obama my fear is that his presidency would be too risk averse and fail to boldly challenge the mindset that produced our current occupation in Iraq or dramatically reverse the crony corporatism that pervades our culture and economy. Obama will facilitate adjustments in the tax code to provide relief for wage earners and with an enhanced Democratic majority deliver something on healthcare. I’m also reasonably confident his selections to the Supreme Court and the federal bench as a whole will have more respect for the Constitution, civil liberties and protecting whistle blowers who tell truth to power. These are not unimportant things.

However, I am not confident that Obama will come up with a bold new economic and social contract like FDR. This country needs a dramatic overhaul in infrastructure as well as committing to the vision expressed by former Vice President Al Gore that we end our dependence on fossil fuels. So far, I’m not seeing or hearing any evidence beyond platitudes that an Obama presidency will be sufficiently bold. In fairness to Obama though, FDR’s 1932 presidential campaign wasn’t especially bold either.

My sense however is that the Obama/Biden ticket represents a restoration of the corporate centrism of George Herbert Walker Bush and Bill Clinton. This brand of corporate centrism cultivates cooperative relationships among democracies and strategic rivals in the name of “stability.”

Under such a regime, when America doesn’t appear to have a dog in a fight such as genocide in Rawanda in the early ‘90s there is a good chance force will not be used. When our energy supply is threatened, as it was when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1991, our military will be deployed. Corporate centrism is more socially moderate when the president is a Democrat and certainly preferable to McCain. If nothing else governments will not be toppled gratuitously and allies needlessly alienated. But it’s not good enough.

So my message to all like-minded progressives is that while the cause is better served with a President Obama the fight does not end there. A progressive reform majority is essential in congress as well as state legislatures and governor mansions from coast to coast if America is to become better global citizens abroad that also promotes dignity and economic citizens for all our citizens at home.

Ironically, Obama himself, a community organizer in his youth has advocated for the American people to push for change from the bottom up. So while I am not convinced Obama will be out front on the change we need perhaps his presidency can be a catalyst to the public mobilizing in a direction of national renewal on behalf of working people, civil liberties and social justice. At least I hope so.

Apologies To Readers

As you can see I haven't been active recently. Since the end of July I've had no high speed Internet access at home due to tech issues regarding my PC. All I have is dialup at home and can't maintain a connection long enough to blog effectively. My apologies to loyal readers and I ask for your patience until my tech issues are resolved.

Check Out Comedian & Political Activist Steve Hofstetter

I received an email from comedian and political activist Steve Hofstetter asking me to post his video below encouraging young people to remember 2004's heartbreak and vote this year. I've sampled another of Hofstetter's videos and he's damn funny. If you want a good laugh I suggest clicking here and listening to his video about the lies and politics of drug abuse.

The video below however is a sober reminder about the stakes of this election. Politicians disappoint and let us down. Our ultimate salvation resides with truth tellers such as Hofstetter who utilize their talents to promote awareness and combat apathy.

Truth and Consequences

As this presidential campaign unfolds there are three truths being neglected by Obama and McCain, the corporate media and the entire political class:

• America no longer has the leverage, infrastructure and intellectual heft to maintain a corporate empire through military and economic power.

• Unless there is accountability for the Bush Administration’s war crimes committed since 9/11 America is in grave danger.

• Our society has insufficient institutions to safeguard the livelihoods of wage earners in a 21st century global economy.
  

The silence on these truths is deafening. As Frank Rich noted in today’s New York Times, the Bush Administration’s torture regime has actually facilitated the resurgence of al Quaeda. But Rich is only one truth teller within the decrepit corporate media establishment and he’s pissing in the wind. Meanwhile, in a post cold war world other countries don’t automatically rally to our banner. And in a post 9/11 world we’ve managed to alienate the civilized world while emboldening our enemies.

Our financial and banking system has become a brutal hockey game without impartial referees. McCain and Obama are debating whether to target tax cuts for the rich or the elusive middle class when we really need an entirely new socio-economic model. Christ, does McCain really believe that a balanced budget and holy jihad against pork barrel spending can be an elixir for the mess we’re in? And how does Obama really hope to assuage what ails America by violating the constitution and expanding Bush’s faith based initiatives?

Neither McCain nor Obama are addressing these realities because our culture doesn’t embrace truth. 2008 is 1932 on steroids. But Americans just want to elect somebody who will promise to let them party like it’s 1999. Do enough Americans get it? Do enough Americans want to get it? Ultimately, Obama and McCain are a reflection of us.

Senator Russ Feingold: The Indispensable Liberal

Thankfully, as we celebrate our independence this July 4th, we have Russ Feingold exhorting us to stand up for our civil liberties. Sadly, Feingold has had to shame his colleagues who mostly haven't read the so-called FISA compromise and could care less about its contents. Feingold's valiant efforts have helped to delay passage of this feculent legislation for the time being. It will require aggressive citizen action however to prevail over the well funded telecommunication companies.

Memo To Obama: Enough of the Battered Wife Syndrome

I have supported Obama's candidacy since John Edwards departed the race. I still believe it was the right thing to do given the flawed alternative Hillary Clinton represented. To nominate Clinton would have been tantamount to rewarding poor judgment (Iraq) and bad behavior (race baiting). So I did some phone banking, donated to Obama's campaign and will continue to support his candidacy against John McCain. To elect McCain would be a calamity.

However, Obama's campaign has in recent days demonstrated the same chronic pathology of the Democratic Party itself: battered wife syndrome. Yes, I know the rationale is that Obama had to move to the center for the general election campaign. I understand that is inevitable and to some degree necessary. And I am willing to cut Obama some slack. Power without principle is barren and principle without power is futile and I appreciate the delicate balance. I also appreciate that as the first black nominee of a major political party Obama is walking a tightrope.

However, Obama's retreat on FISA resembles Bill Clinton's despicable calculation about welfare reform in 1996: removing an issue from the table and playing not to lose regardless of the human consequences. I don't want the standard bearer of my party to play not to lose when it comes to my civil liberties.

It's also bad politics. Jon Tester prevailed in his 2006 Montana senate campaign against Conrad Burns while opposing the Partiot Act! And Montana isn't exactly known for their latte drinking limousine liberals. They're plenty of civil libertarian minded people in America who would applaud Obama if he stood up for principle and opposed this corporate fascist legislation. FISA is corporate welfare and get out of jail free cards for the telecommunication companies. But the Democrats are so damn scared of the big bad elephant that their standard bearer ducks and covers when it's time to stand up and be counted! Or is Obama's stance appeasement for Democrats such as Jay Rockefeller, their ranking member on the Senate Intelligence Committee and a shameless whore for telecommunications money? Either way it's inexcusable.

Today, Obama again demonstrated battered wife syndrome and fearfully distanced himself from Wesley Clark. Clark merely had the temerity to suggest that McCain's history as a POW, while meriting our respect doesn't qualify him to be commander and chief. Clark didn't question McCain's patriotism or his service to his country like Republicans did to war veteran John Kerry in 2004. Wesley Clark is arguably the most effective surrogate the Democratic party has on national security issues and Obama allowed the McCain campaign to take him out!

It seems when Democrats are in a tight race their battered wife syndrome surfaces because they don't want to lose on the margins. And when the political winds are at their back Democrats become cautious because they don't want to blow a lead. We've seen this from Democratic nominees before. The stakes for America and the world are too high for Dukakis, Gore and Kerry redux. And what if you do win as expected Senator? As president, will you duck and cover as soon as the conservatives have a bug up their butts or disavow fellow Democrats like Wesley Clark who dare to challenge Republicans about their weak national security credentials? You're better than that. Act like it.

Renegade Justice: An Interview With Former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias

David Iglesias is the prototype twenty first century Republican: charismatic, Hispanic, an evangelical Christian and a captain in the Navy Reserve who served for many years in the Navy’s Judge Advocate General Corps (“JAG”). In 1998, Iglesias campaigned to become Attorney General of New Mexico against the heavily favored Patricia Madrid. He nearly pulled off an upset and the Republican Party took notice. In 2000, Iglesias paid his party dues and worked for George W. Bush’s election.

As a reward, President Bush nominated Iglesias in 2001 to be the United States Attorney from the District of New Mexico. His sponsor was longtime Republican Senator Pete Domenici. The position of U.S. Attorney has served as a springboard for many political careers and Iglesias appeared to be on the fast track. Highly regarded by his peers, Iglesias served as chairman of a committee of U.S. Attorneys that advised former Attorney General John Ashcroft about border and Immigration issues. The Justice Department had also given his office high marks for performance.

However, as the first installment of the just released Department of Justice Inspector General report illustrates, professionalism took a back seat to political prerogatives when it came to personnel decisions. A pervasive culture of hyper-partisanship at the Justice Department ultimately cost David Iglesias and nine other U.S. Attorneys their jobs last year. It also resulted in a metastasizing scandal that forced Bush loyalist Alberto Gonazles to resign as Attorney General.

David Iglesias became persona non grata in the Republican Party when he resisted political pressure while carrying out the responsibilities of his office. One example was his cautious evidenced based approach while prosecuting voter fraud. Specifically, Republicans feared that the votes of minorities and the poor in New Mexico could adversely affect their candidates in what had become a polarized state. Al Gore defeated George Bush in New Mexico by a mere 366 votes in 2000. Hence, Republicans viewed prosecuting voter fraud as a means of suppressing Democratic turnout in elections that could be decided on the margins. Iglesias dutifully investigated voter fraud and found virtually nothing to prosecute, angering the White House.

Another example involved a public corruption investigation against powerful Democratic New Mexico state legislator Manny Aragon. In 2006, while Iglesias took a measured evidenced based approach to investigating Aragon; Republican Congresswoman Heather Wilson was in a tough re-election fight against New Mexico’s Democratic Attorney General, Patricia Madrid. The same candidate Iglesias lost to in 1998. Republicans hoped that an indictment filed against Aragon prior to Election Day would make Madrid appear professionally lax as New Mexico’s Attorney General. However, Iglesias didn’t believe the case was ready and didn’t want to undermine the investigation or chances of conviction by filing an indictment prematurely.

The events that followed are well known. Both Representative Wilson and Senator Domenici inappropriately telephoned Iglesias hoping to persuade him to indict Aragon. Iglesias didn’t budge and he was asked to resign on December 7, 2006. Six of his colleagues with similar experiences were also asked to resign on the same day and a political firestorm engulfed the Bush Administration, his Attorney General and the entire Republican Party. Domenici, his reputation and legacy forever tarnished opted not to seek re-election this year because of poor health. Congressman Wilson hoped to replace Domenici in the Senate but she lost the Republican primary on June 3rd.

Iglesias memorialized his experience with his new book, In Justice: Inside The Scandal That Rocked The Bush Administration (Wiley & Sons). Former Ambassador Joseph Wilson had the following praise for Iglesias’s book:

“In justice is a chilling tale of the subversion of the Constitution for political purposes. What was done to David Iglesias and his colleagues constitutes complete and utter disregard for the role of law that underpins our great republic. Americas will rightly be appalled and Republicans ashamed at this abuse of power.”

Iglesias agreed to podcast interview with me over the telephone about his book and the scandal that made him an important historical figure. Our conversation was just over sixteen minutes. Please refer to the flash media player below.



This interview can also be accessed at no cost via the Itunes store by searching for the Intrepid Liberal Journal. Also, I apologize for my voice coming in on the low side. I was using a new headphones/microphone set and it underperformed. Thankfully, David's voice comes through loud and clear. But you may have to turn up the volume some to hear my questions.

FISA and The Democrats

I am a loyal and committed Democrat. However, my first loyalty is to our Constitution. Unquestionably, the Democratic Party's capitulation to the Bush Administration with respect to the FISA protocol is a disgrace. My favorite Democrat, Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold issued the following statement about it on June 19th:

“The proposed FISA deal is not a compromise; it is a capitulation. The House and Senate should not be taking up this bill, which effectively guarantees immunity for telecom companies alleged to have participated in the President’s illegal program, and which fails to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans at home. Allowing courts to review the question of immunity is meaningless when the same legislation essentially requires the court to grant immunity. And under this bill, the government can still sweep up and keep the international communications of innocent Americans in the U.S. with no connection to suspected terrorists, with very few safeguards to protect against abuse of this power. Instead of cutting bad deals on both FISA and funding for the war in Iraq, Democrats should be standing up to the flawed and dangerous policies of this administration.”

Refer to the YouTube video below for another scathing perspective from George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley.



Note how Turley describes the capitulation as a form of immunity for the Democratic Party's leadership which looked the other way during the worst of the Bush Administration's civil liberty abuses in recent years. While I support the Democratic Party, their current generation of leadership is an abysmal failure and needs to be jettisoned forthwith. In the meantime, we must pressure the party leadership as much as possible to move in a more civil libertarian direction. Click here to contact your representative in the House and here to lobby your Senators. This is important.